We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 13 June 2018 to ask the service the following key questions; Are services safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Our findings were:

Are services safe?

We found that this service was providing safe care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services effective?

We found that this service was providing effective care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services caring?

We found that this service was providing caring services in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services responsive?

We found that this service was providing responsive care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

Are services well-led?

We found that this service was providing well-led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the service was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

Private Walk-In Clinic registered with CQC under the provider organisation SomDoc Walk-In Clinic Limited in July 2016.

Private Walk-In Clinic is a private GP service located in Shepherds Bush, South West London. The service provides primary medical services for fee-paying patients. Services include GP consultations, diagnostic tests, health screening, well person health checks, travel vaccines and advice. The clinical team consists of two male GP partners one of whom is the principal GP; both are directors of the provider organisation. Two long-term locum GPs; one male and one female, a practice manager, phlebotomist and three reception/administration staff, support them. The service operates from 9:30am to 5pm seven days a week.

The principal GP is the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who is registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

As part of our inspection, we asked for CQC comment cards to be completed by patients. All the 23 patient comment cards we received were positive about the service experienced. Staff were described by patients as professional, very caring, courteous, helpful and kind. Some comments referred to the efficiency of making an appointment and unhurried consultations. We spoke with three patients directly at the inspection and their comments also aligned with these views.

Our key findings were:

The service was providing safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led care in accordance with the relevant regulations.

• There were systems in place to keep patients safe and safeguarded from abuse. All staff had undertaken safeguarding training relevant to their role.
• Processes were in place for recording, investigating and learning from significant events and incidents.

• The service assessed risks to patient safety and the premises appeared to be well- maintained.

• The service had adequate arrangements for response to medical emergencies and major incidents.
• Care and treatment was provided in line with evidence-based guidance.

• The service undertook quality improvement activity including clinical audits initiatives.

• Staff worked with other health professionals where appropriate and supported patients to lead healthier lifestyles.
• The service demonstrated a strong commitment to the Somali community and was actively involved in promoting healthier lifestyles.
• Staff understood the relevant consent and decision-making requirements of legislation and guidance, including the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

• Patient feedback through CQC comment cards and the provider’s own surveys showed patients were happy with the service received and that they felt involved in decisions about their care.
• Services provided were responsive to the needs of the population served. This included timely and flexible access.

• There were clear leadership and governance arrangements to support the running of the service and delivery of high quality care. Staff felt valued and supported.
• The service was aware of and had systems to ensure compliance with the requirements of the duty of candour.

There were areas where the service could make improvements and should:

• Review the arrangements for documenting actions taken in response to safety alerts received.
• Review and embed legionella prevention monitoring tasks in accordance with risk assessment recommendations.
• Review and improve the arrangements for the verification of immunity status and vaccination history for reception staff.
• Review and improve the arrangements for not having a hearing loop to assist patients with impaired hearing and absence of an emergency call alarm in the public toilet facility.
• Review and improve the arrangements in place for instructing patients to seek assistance from alternative services when the practice is closed.